Jacksonville Jaguars Fan Forums

I got interested because of the video title, but chess is just the example he uses to enter the subject.  Why aren't women as good at chess as men?  What that leads to is the question, why aren't there more women at the highest level of math and science?  There are a variety of theories. The two main ones are: a) lack of participation, and b) inherent differences in mental ability at the highest level.  In other words, even though on average, women have the same mental abilities as men, there are more really brilliant men and more really stupid men.  And then, does the same theory apply when it comes to professional sports and the dominance of African American athletes at the highest level?   

Why do men dominate chess?

When there is a sociopolitical movement which refuses to define what a woman is, and declares any attempt to do so as some form of nebulous “phobia”, the answer will never be found.

Evolution answers all the questions you posed. As humans continue to evolve and the roles of male/female, black/white/Asian/any ethic group become more similar and entwined then the disparities between us all will fade.

Other than what the kids says. (Well maybe, who knows where medical science might end up)

Perhaps Bunnie and Americus could explain once they put shoes on and come out of the kitchen. 

(12-19-2024, 09:32 AM)homebiscuit Wrote: [ -> ]Perhaps Bunnie and Americus could explain once they put shoes on and come out of the kitchen. 

Only as long as they have some pies in their hands.

(12-19-2024, 09:35 AM)Jagwired Wrote: [ -> ]

(12-19-2024, 09:32 AM)homebiscuit Wrote: [ -> ]Perhaps Bunnie and Americus could explain once they put shoes on and come out of the kitchen. 

Only as long as they have some pies in their hands.

If you two continue on this track your on your own. Last time I did that with 2 ladies they threw the pies in our faces...lol

(12-19-2024, 09:37 AM)Jag149 Wrote: [ -> ]

(12-19-2024, 09:35 AM)Jagwired Wrote: [ -> ]Only as long as they have some pies in their hands.

If you two continue on this track your on your own. Last time I did that with 2 ladies they threw the pies in our faces...lol

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/BobF0gyaEKI

Interesting neuro and physiological question, which you can ask of an endless range of behaviors and abilities.  Putting races aside for the moment and focusing on gender, if men and women naturally develop with undeniable physical differences, why not in other ways as well?

(12-19-2024, 09:32 AM)homebiscuit Wrote: [ -> ]Perhaps Bunnie and Americus could explain once they put shoes on and come out of the kitchen. 

I'll ask my wife after she makes my breakfast.

The interesting question to me is, are the smartest men smarter than the smartest women, and are the dumbest men dumber than the dumbest women?  In other words, even though men and women could be, on average, equally talented mentally, do men occupy more of the extremes of the bell curve?

(12-19-2024, 10:37 AM)The Real Marty Wrote: [ -> ]The interesting question to me is, are the smartest men smarter than the smartest women, and are the dumbest men dumber than the dumbest women?  In other words, even though men and women could be, on average, equally talented mentally, do men occupy more of the extremes of the bell curve?

I've heard smart sounding people say yes they do, and that it's because we only have one x chromosome that either has very good traits or very bad ones.  When I was younger I would have found that credible but now I find it speculative.  

There are inherent differences in the toys most children are interested in at different ages, I never prevented my kids from playing with the "wrong" toys for their gender but after about age 3 they didn't really want to anyways.  

One difference I've seen in children is most boys have a strong competitive nature and most girls have a strong team building nature.  Neither of my kids are very competitive but as I've had them both in youth sports I definitely see that difference play out in their teammates.

(12-19-2024, 10:49 AM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]

(12-19-2024, 10:37 AM)The Real Marty Wrote: [ -> ]The interesting question to me is, are the smartest men smarter than the smartest women, and are the dumbest men dumber than the dumbest women?  In other words, even though men and women could be, on average, equally talented mentally, do men occupy more of the extremes of the bell curve?

I've heard smart sounding people say yes they do, and that it's because we only have one x chromosome that either has very good traits or very bad ones.  When I was younger I would have found that credible but now I find it speculative.  

There are inherent differences in the toys most children are interested in at different ages, I never prevented my kids from playing with the "wrong" toys for their gender but after about age 3 they didn't really want to anyways.  

One difference I've seen in children is most boys have a strong competitive nature and most girls have a strong team building nature.  Neither of my kids are very competitive but as I've had them both in youth sports I definitely see that difference play out in their teammates.

In terms of chess, there have been very few elite women chess players.  Judit Polgar was once the 8th rated chess player in the world, but that's about it.  The politically correct thing to say is that it's because not very many women play chess.  The politically incorrect thing to say is that it's because of inherent differences, such as men inherently being more aggressive, which makes them more competitive.  If that is true, then the implications are profound, especially in a society that is supposed to be a meritocracy.  It would mean that there will always be many more men who are qualified to be CEO of a company, or General of an army, for example.  It would mean that any effort to equalize things is pointless.  Competitiveness is a key quality for a person to have in a meritocracy.

Inherent differences are an uncomfortable question for some people.  Why is it that a disproportionate number of elite professional athletes are African American?  Several times I've seen African Americans say it's because of they are inherently better athletes, but then what happens is another African American will immediately say "You can't say that." And the reason is, if you say Black people are better at athletics, then you are saying there are inherent differences between the races, and then a white guy can say, "You are better at athletics, and we are better at math and science."  And then you've stepped right into racism.

(12-19-2024, 10:57 AM)The Real Marty Wrote: [ -> ]

(12-19-2024, 10:49 AM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]I've heard smart sounding people say yes they do, and that it's because we only have one x chromosome that either has very good traits or very bad ones.  When I was younger I would have found that credible but now I find it speculative.  

There are inherent differences in the toys most children are interested in at different ages, I never prevented my kids from playing with the "wrong" toys for their gender but after about age 3 they didn't really want to anyways.  

One difference I've seen in children is most boys have a strong competitive nature and most girls have a strong team building nature.  Neither of my kids are very competitive but as I've had them both in youth sports I definitely see that difference play out in their teammates.

In terms of chess, there have been very few elite women chess players.  Judit Polgar was once the 8th rated chess player in the world, but that's about it.  The politically correct thing to say is that it's because not very many women play chess.  The politically incorrect thing to say is that it's because of inherent differences, such as men inherently being more aggressive, which makes them more competitive.  If that is true, then the implications are profound, especially in a society that is supposed to be a meritocracy.  It would mean that there will always be many more men who are qualified to be CEO of a company, or General of an army, for example.  It would mean that any effort to equalize things is pointless.  Competitiveness is a key quality for a person to have in a meritocracy.

Inherent differences are an uncomfortable question for some people.  Why is it that a disproportionate number of elite professional athletes are African American?  Several times I've seen African Americans say it's because of they are inherently better athletes, but then what happens is another African American will immediately say "You can't say that." And the reason is, if you say Black people are better at athletics, then you are saying there are inherent differences between the races, and then a white guy can say, "You are better at athletics, and we are better at math and science."  And then you've stepped right into racism.

I can see this. The trick in my opinion is to just see people. Anytime you try to artificially make things "equal" by passing laws, demonizing others or protesting you actually set things back.  Instead if you concentrate on providing equal chances for all people then competition will sort this out over time, the cream will rise to the top. Those people that choose to do the work and take advantage of this will improve their lot in life those that don't will not. Racism is a two edged sword.

If you have ever read "The Invisible Partner" by Dr Carl Jung (which I have) You just might come to the belief that there is really no difference mentally between the sexes because everyone of us has traits of both sexes in us in various forms. Some are just more dominate than others in certain people........ Physically there are great difference that why I think Bio males should not compete in women's sports....... The 1000th best male in his sport can too easily become the best "Female" in womens sports..........

As enlightened as we have become “boys don’t like girls who are smarter than them, you’ll never get a husband like that” is still a prevalent thing among way too many people. It’s been only about 50 years or so where a woman could get her own checking account without a husband. Girls have just recently started to be pushed towards STEM programs.

Think about how you talk to little boys and little girls. Boys get told how smart they are, how strong they are, how clever they are. Girls get told how pretty they are. Of course not everyone does this, and it’s becoming less common because people realize how detrimental this kind of praise is, you I should say lack of praise is for little girls.

So dads on here, next time you tell your daughter she’s pretty, tell her how freaking awesome and smart she is too!

(12-19-2024, 11:41 AM)Jag149 Wrote: [ -> ]

(12-19-2024, 10:57 AM)The Real Marty Wrote: [ -> ]In terms of chess, there have been very few elite women chess players.  Judit Polgar was once the 8th rated chess player in the world, but that's about it.  The politically correct thing to say is that it's because not very many women play chess.  The politically incorrect thing to say is that it's because of inherent differences, such as men inherently being more aggressive, which makes them more competitive.  If that is true, then the implications are profound, especially in a society that is supposed to be a meritocracy.  It would mean that there will always be many more men who are qualified to be CEO of a company, or General of an army, for example.  It would mean that any effort to equalize things is pointless.  Competitiveness is a key quality for a person to have in a meritocracy.

Inherent differences are an uncomfortable question for some people.  Why is it that a disproportionate number of elite professional athletes are African American?  Several times I've seen African Americans say it's because of they are inherently better athletes, but then what happens is another African American will immediately say "You can't say that." And the reason is, if you say Black people are better at athletics, then you are saying there are inherent differences between the races, and then a white guy can say, "You are better at athletics, and we are better at math and science."  And then you've stepped right into racism.

I can see this. The trick in my opinion is to just see people. Anytime you try to artificially make things "equal" by passing laws, demonizing others or protesting you actually set things back.  Instead if you concentrate on providing equal chances for all people then competition will sort this out over time, the cream will rise to the top. Those people that choose to do the work and take advantage of this will improve their lot in life those that don't will not. Racism is a two edged sword.

That's idealistic, but what happens when the cream rises to the top and it's mostly from one group?  People start looking for reasons that fit their own point of view.  Then the blame game starts, and the assumption from some people is that the "winning" group got there because of an unfair system.  And if you don't agree with that, you get burned at the stake.

Right now in chess, they've tried to rectify the inequality by setting up special tournaments just for women, and a special category of grandmaster, called "women's grandmaster" where women can qualify for that title without being a real grandmaster.  Supposedly this is to encourage more women to participate in chess.  I think that whole approach is very demeaning to women, and some women who hold the real grandmaster title have refused to participate in such activities.

(12-19-2024, 12:11 PM)The Real Marty Wrote: [ -> ]

(12-19-2024, 11:41 AM)Jag149 Wrote: [ -> ]I can see this. The trick in my opinion is to just see people. Anytime you try to artificially make things "equal" by passing laws, demonizing others or protesting you actually set things back.  Instead if you concentrate on providing equal chances for all people then competition will sort this out over time, the cream will rise to the top. Those people that choose to do the work and take advantage of this will improve their lot in life those that don't will not. Racism is a two edged sword.

That's idealistic, but what happens when the cream rises to the top and it's mostly from one group?  People start looking for reasons that fit their own point of view.  Then the blame game starts, and the assumption from some people is that the "winning" group got there because of an unfair system.  And if you don't agree with that, you get burned at the stake.

I can't tell you how this approach worked with others. I can say it was part of my secret sauce that has helped me in life be successful. My guess, as I didn't keep score is the result was many what we call minorities fared much better than one would think. It is amazing what motivated hard working people can contribute when they want to. The downside I found was there are some who talk a good game but fail to put in the work, that is where metrics which required work on my part came in. Yes, there comes a point where people not being perfect get jealous. Best thing to do then is give them a few small opportunities with very small projects to work, most will not. Those that do well get increasingly larger ones.

(12-19-2024, 08:52 AM)The Real Marty Wrote: [ -> ]I got interested because of the video title, but chess is just the example he uses to enter the subject.  Why aren't women as good at chess as men?  What that leads to is the question, why aren't there more women at the highest level of math and science?  There are a variety of theories. The two main ones are: a) lack of participation, and b) inherent differences in mental ability at the highest level.  In other words, even though on average, women have the same mental abilities as men, there are more really brilliant men and more really stupid men.  And then, does the same theory apply when it comes to professional sports and the dominance of African American athletes at the highest level?   

Why do men dominate chess?

Culture and traditions make it so that MUCH FEWER women enter fields of math and science. With much smaller pool of women, it's much more likely that men end up at the top.

As I've observed in a number of "traditional" (Republican parent) families, they encourage boys to succeed in these subjects and emphasize doing well in homework while praising girls for cleaning up well and cooking good dinners.

Just watched the video. It agrees. And throws in some other possibilities that sound plausible too. I'd still guess what I said is the dominant factor over others.

(12-19-2024, 12:35 PM)Jag149 Wrote: [ -> ]

(12-19-2024, 12:11 PM)The Real Marty Wrote: [ -> ]That's idealistic, but what happens when the cream rises to the top and it's mostly from one group?  People start looking for reasons that fit their own point of view.  Then the blame game starts, and the assumption from some people is that the "winning" group got there because of an unfair system.  And if you don't agree with that, you get burned at the stake.

I can't tell you how this approach worked with others. I can say it was part of my secret sauce that has helped me in life be successful. My guess, as I didn't keep score is the result was many what we call minorities fared much better than one would think. It is amazing what motivated hard working people can contribute when they want to. The downside I found was there are some who talk a good game but fail to put in the work, that is where metrics which required work on my part came in. Yes, there comes a point where people not being perfect get jealous. Best thing to do then is give them a few small opportunities with very small projects to work, most will not. Those that do well get increasingly larger ones.

I don't understand this post. You are a white man, yes? I thought the topic was, what might work to increase professional success for girls or minorities. So if you can't tell us that your approach works for anyone but you, what exactly are you contributing to this conversation?

(12-19-2024, 11:58 AM)Bchbunnie4 Wrote: [ -> ]As enlightened as we have become “boys don’t like girls who are smarter than them, you’ll never get a husband like that” is still a prevalent thing among way too many people. It’s been only about 50 years or so where a woman could get her own checking account without a husband. Girls have just recently started to be pushed towards STEM programs.

Think about how you talk to little boys and little girls. Boys get told how smart they are, how strong they are, how clever they are. Girls get told how pretty they are. Of course not everyone does this, and it’s becoming less common because people realize how detrimental this kind of praise is, you I should say lack of praise is for little girls.

So dads on here, next time you tell your daughter she’s pretty, tell her how freaking awesome and smart she is too!

I'm involved with my two kids at church and at cub scouts.  I never heard anyone talk to the girls (and about 1/4 of the scouts are girls now) about how pretty or cute they are. That message has been received at least in my neck of the woods.

However the social scientists are raising alarm bells with Gen Z (who are in their 20s now) that the girls have absorbed the "get as much education and professional development as possible" message but the boys have not absorbed the "your partner may be more accomplished than you and that's OK" message.  Seems we recalibrated one of the genders without recalibrating the other.  

FWIW L2L and I both are with women who are more accomplished and higher earning than us.  But the polling consistently says that most younger unattached men don't want that for themselves.